You still did not explain why you cant ignore non-stock configurations in campaign play or play stock only mode in PVP. [Mod Edit: Personal] based on something that you can just ignore.
Last edited by a moderator:
Excuse me, but what is this??? [Solved]
- Thread starter Scarish
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
- Status
You still did not explain why you cant ignore non-stock configurations in campaign play or play stock only mode in PVP. [Mod Edit: Personal] based on something that you can just ignore.
it really does not matter how you define it, The hardpoints are a matter of contention for nearly everyone in some form or another. Its not really a solution it just shifts customisation into more limits and does not solve the underlying issue.
I would be happy without them
Sometimes a good compromise in a partisan divide is one that doesn't give either extreme what they want, but it gives everyone what they Need.
Stock only is possible.
Many forms of customization are possible.
The largest range between the two sides is achieved.
It might not please every taste, but it is a good median considering the devs mechanical programming and graphics concerns as well.
Sadly discussion since the IP started should inform us that no one solution will ever please everyone.
Imho.
Stock only is possible.
Many forms of customization are possible.
The largest range between the two sides is achieved.
It might not please every taste, but it is a good median considering the devs mechanical programming and graphics concerns as well.
Sadly discussion since the IP started should inform us that no one solution will ever please everyone.
Imho.
Sorry, but i never ignore the broken promises. And i can't ignore the fact such a mutants are possible while the Devs promised us the opposite. This is simply ruining my feeling of the game. And especially such a mutants as GaussCat/AC20Cat will ruin it in MP, just like it was in MWO, if custom Mechs will be allowed. At least because this will shrink the number of potential opponents. And i repeat it again, this do not 'feels-like-BT-lore' that 'preserves the essential character of each Mech variant', as it was promised. Should i be happy with these obvious facts? NO way.
Last edited by a moderator:
Again, you can play stock only. There are already plenty of people here on the forums who also said they'd play stock only PvP as well. However, there are also those that like to customize their 'mechs and they can do so too.
Both sides can be happy. There are plenty of people on both sides of the fence to play amongst each other. Hell there are even those who don't care and will go either way.
Actually "hard points" is not BT TT Lore, nor is no custom mechs. I've been seeing this argument a lot in the forums and the one think I remember from Original BT TT was that the sourcebooks were Guidelines, not holy writ. Also there are multiple Construction Rule Sets. If you build it within the give rule set anything that is possible can be built period.
My take back in the 80's playing TableTop until now has always been. Mechs take damage, arms get blown off, torso get blown up, and when you rebuild/repair you use what you have on hand. Originally the Highlander had a Gauss Rifle, when those became lost tech it was replaced with AC/20, and if that gets destroyed in battle and I don't have one to replace it, but I have an AC/10 or even a PPC then that is what is going in that spot until I salvage/purchase an AC/20. That just makes sense IMO, I'm not going to park my Mech and pilot something else because I don't have the "stock" weapons available to repair it with, nor should I have to. So I don't get why this is a problem?
[Edit]
Case in point didn't Kai Allard-Liao drive a custom Centurian on Solaris 7 (don't remember if it was non-standard variant, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) that surprised the competition?
[Correction]
Justin Allard his father piloted Yen-Lo-Wang first and upgraded the AC/10 to an AC/20, giving himself a major LEGAL advantage in competition and a big surprise for anyone thinking it was a standard Centurian. Later the AC/20 was replaced with a IS Gauss Rifle and finally a Clan Gauss Rifle.
Last edited:
I posted the link with the quote. Read the thread carefully, if you're really interested in it.
You can do that in the skirmish 'mech lab, which has everything you need except for improved weapons and equipment.
In Strategic Operations, and therefore strictly optional. We rarely bothered with those in my TT experience.
Sorry, but promises were not broken in this instance. The game feels to me to be very good for 3025. For me it captures very much the feel and is quite satisfactory, thank you very much.
These "obvious facts" are not facts at all, but really your interpretation and nothing more than that. Many people have a different take, including me. Come to think of it you almost get as many opinions as there are players of the game.
On a more serious note: If you feel that promises were broken, htat means you lost money as a backer that you shouldn't have to spend. If true getting a refund is possible - HBS has done this before. If you can live with the game as is and just ignore this feature then by all means, but if you feel the slightest bit cheated then getting your money back is a good option.
Another option is making or waiting for a "Stock only" mod of the JSON files, which I'm sure will come.
- Shane
Sorry, but they were. And this is obvious fact, for me. The words were said, and i quoted them. And honestly, i don't care if you disagree with me. For me K2 Gausscat do not 'preserves the essential character of each Mech variant'. Simply because K2 variant never was a platform for heavy Ballistics or Missiles, it was a platform for heavy Energy weapons. Period.
Which means I have to quit out of the campaign and load up skirmish. Not ideal but better than nothing.
Hmm. Opinion meets Opinion meets Opinion.
Impasse.
As thread OP what direction do you suggest to move discussion forward respectfully? Or is this thread now solved?
Please advise.
The author is not clueless in his statements, the main point is that the developers have broken their promises ...
You specifically provided a link)
https://community.battletechgame.com/forums/threads/9573/comments/182464
Just so I understand correctly, you have no problems with the K2 inexplicably replacing the Catapult's missile systems with long-range energy weapons, because this was written in a book, but replacing those same missile systems with long-range ballistic weapons makes the mech an unconscionable 'mutant'?
As near as I can tell, either Variant is equally far from the original spirit of the mech.
Is this the linked quote you mean?
Look at the bolded sentence, where the developer says right up front that alpha-strike boats are degenerate and they intend to avoid making them possible.
Guess you didn't read that part?
Regardless, zero promises are made in this quote-mash, and certainly they do not promise to prevent the K2 from being able to mount autocannons. All they say is that at this phase in development they aren't sure what to do with MGs & Flamers. Well, we later found out what they did with them: created their own little niche weapon category, so they are still interesting / useful and also not something you can strip to replace with big guns. That has nothing to do with frankenmechs at all.
I'm familiar with that discussion on that old forum thread.
However, @CmdrDunsail while an excellent moderator , is not a dev.
Also, Devs share their perspective in the moment, and is subject to change as the project coalesces.
Let's not convince them that sharing caveat laden plans with us is no longer constructive due to how we respond to it.
Last edited:
Wait, are you trying to say he took those words out of his head? Not simply quoted the words told by the one of Developers??? Just say it, and it will have some really funny consequences.
Nope. I'm saying they're not promises. They're "here's what we are thinking"Wait, are you trying to say he took those words out of his head? Not simply quoted the words told by the one of Developers??? Just say it, and it will have some really funny consequences.
- Status